Illinois Governor Arrested

Obama went against the Clinton operation and the GOP election machine, the two best opposition research operations of our lifetime, had there been much to find they would have found it. You can't be birthed in the swamp of Illinois politics and not get at least a little bit dirty, but Obama is remarkably clean, which is why what little there is to find was never used against him successfully. The evidence paints a picture of Obama navigating the landmines and getting out, it is evidence of Obama's skill and good judgement. It is also evidence of fortitude, as a leaser idealistic dreamer would have walked away from politics when he discovered how dirty it was where he was, Obama pressed on.

The very arguments you use to attempt to negate Obama is to me evidence of the opposite argument. It proves his greatness.

hawkeye, I don't happen to believe Obama is as clean from corruption as you claim. I believe the press is protecting his image. There is plenty to investigate, if anyone had the curiosity. There have been lots of crooks that have crawled out of swamps, only to later be discovered how crooked they were.

To be honest, I supported, I hoped Obama would defeat Hillary, so that we could get rid of the Clintons. I got my wish, but only part of it, as the Clintons are still very much involved, and they are not going away. If you want to observed how crooked people can be and still be worshiped on the national stage, you only need to look at the Clintons, very corrupt pair in my opinion, yet they stand as icons of the Democratic Party.

The fact that Obama is where he is, does not in any way indicate he is clean of corruption. The man is a contradiction in so many ways, now claiming no pork, no lobbyists, no corruption, an open process, and just the opposite has happened since he took office. Yet, he looks us in the face and has the audacity to repeat the nonsense. And just look at the Blago affair, which has been swept under the rug in regard to Obama, but Obama did not tell the truth in that regard, and there is ample reason to think he knows more than he lets on. We know he has been buddies with Rezko, a convicted felon, and we also know about other shady dealings in Chicago that Obama has been connected with.

Okie, it is funny to see you and some others constantly insinuating that there must be something corrupt about Obama. Should you wish to find out and out corruption, all you need do is look at McCain. As the leader of the Keating Five, he cost the taxpayers many billions of dollars.

Advocate, yes it is a bit troubling, however from the things I have read, McCain apparently did nothing wrong, and although it puts an asterisk next to McCain's name, it has never been shown to be any more than poor judgement, not corruption at all. Upon observing McCain throughout this campaign, I think he is probably a pretty honest man. I have said that I think he is somewhat naive at times, in regard to some issues especially, but McCain is not corrupt I do not think.

Everybody is entitled to their opinion, and yes I realize nothing has been proven about Obama, but the potential is pretty high that he is not as pure as the wind driven snow, yes, just my opinion. But again, where are all the reporters and investigators that went to Wasilla, Alaska? Or the ones that investigated Joe, the Plumber, or for that matter all the ones that are probably very much involved in investigating every conservative pundit they can find? For the Anointed One, however, its hands off, that is pretty obvious, and most reporters probably do not want to be on his enemies list.

It is clear from the record that McCain accepted lush trips and gifts from Keating, and returned the favor by pushing legislation that made it easy for Keating and other operators to loot their S & L's. The slightest research would confirm this, which has been covered in this board ad nauseam.

There is no doubt that the Reps have investigated O to death. Moreover, they found nothing. You should move on until you can find something that is real.

I think you are drinking the koolaid, for sure, Advocate.

And I would like to remind you again about your concern for illegal immigration and our Israel policy, at least those two issues, but there may be others that you will find out Obama is not your man. I think you are going to be mightily and greatly disappointed and disillusioned with Obama by the time this term is over. There is no doubt you just do not understand the man and his politics at all, in my opinion. Just don't say you were not warned.

Here is the evidence against Obama:

l. He obviously slept through all of Reverend Wright's sermons each week for twenty years since he never heard any of Wright's blasohemies against the USA or the eviul doctors who created AIDS to commit genocide against black people.

2. He got a big break on the price he paid for his Chicago mansion. But, there was no impropriety involved! Even though the man who wheeled and dealed for Obama bought a piece of property adjacent to Obama's mansion which lowever the price. The man who did it? Why Anton Rezko,jailed political fixer who introduced Obama to many in Chicago after Obama graduated from Harvard Law School. But, of course,if Obama knew Rezko was crooked, he never never never would have had anything to do with him.

3. Obama lived in the same neighborhood as William Ayres, the mad bomber and former Weatherman who bombed the Pentagon. Now,just because Obama sat on a board for several years with Ayres and just because Obama gained entry on to another board run by Ayres, does not mean that he knew him. Oh, no, andObama,as intelligent as he is,probably did not know thatAyres was a Weatherman--or else, Obama, as smart as he is,would think that even being on a board with such a person would reflect on his judgment.

4.Obama was a strong backer of the impeached Gov.Blagojevich during his gtenure as a Senator and as a state legislator. Of course, as briliant as Obama is,he had no idea that Blogjevich was involved in Play for Pay for years.

Oh,no. If the highly moral Obama had known about that he would have blown the whistle--That's how moral Obama is. But he did not know!

********************************************************************

Now, some do not wish to accept that evidence. That is not surprising.

However, it would appear that only a month into his presidency, cracks are appearing in the Obama legend BESIDES the ones listed above.

a. His job approval rating( See Rasmussen) has dropped from 68% when he was inaugurated to 58% yesterday--quite a drop in only one month_WHY?

b. His acolyte, Roland Burris from Illinois, who was sworn in as Senator as a replacement for Obama has been asked to resign by both Chicago Newspapers as well as the new governor, Quinn.


It seems that the tarnish is already showing up!!!

Hawkeye, it's sentiment like this that really worries me about you Obamaniacs. The man's only been in office for one month....It's very premature (and a little bit creepy) to assert "his greatness" this early in his presidency. You're putting the man on a pedestal that he is certainly to fall from...

I didn't expect O to be completely in accord with my views. Overall, however, he will probably be very good for the country. We shall see. I do think he will share my views on Israel, if not on illegals.

You present nothing solid that is negative relative to O. Wow, he allegedly lived on the same street as Ayres. Isn't that enough to start impeachment proceedings? Incidentally, Ayres is a great American who has performed wonderful public service. I can't think of a single prominent Rep who has done near as much.

I don't think he would be considered a prominent Rep anymore than Ayres is considered a prominent Dem, but Eric Robert Rudolph would seem to be someone who (perhaps in a couple decades) could lay claim to the same history of "wonderful public service" as Ayres.

Your lack of belief in redemption says a lot about you.

The young Ayres was the antithesis of the young, Nazi, Rudolph. Ayres never hurt anyone and was getting publicity for the atrocities we were committing in Nam. The Nazis slaughtered untold millions of innocents. Your comparison is utterly ridiculous.

At this point the only difference between Rudolph and Ayres is that Ayres terrorist acts occurred 40 years ago, and consequently Ayres has had opportunity to establish a second career (while notably not offering any regrets for his first)...There's nothing to indicate that Rudolph will not redeem himself similarly, even though its unlikely he'll do it outside the walls of his prison.

Change the wording around just a bit to reflect the atrocities of abortion, and Rudolph would fit the same template.

Talk about going off on a tangent.

Grasping at straws in order to avoid dealing with the bankruptcy of ones beliefs has a way of doing that. Denial/avoidance runs strong with moderns, this ain't a good thing for sure.

So, are you saying that its OK to commit violent crimes, to build bombs, knowing that your bombs will be used to kill people, just to make a political point and show your oposition to something?

Using that argument, any bombings of abortion clinics, any bombings of newspapers someone disagrees with, any violent acts committed as any type of protest must be OK.

Do you really mean to say that?

mm, I understand your point, but reality dictates to us that when anybody changes their lives around from being a liability to being an asset to society, there must be some area of leniency towards them. On the extreme side of our legal system, we allow murders and rapists to be released from our prisons. Surely, there must be made some accommodations to those who have really changed their lives around.

Les Miserables comes to mind.

MM, you really need to read a bit. His bombs were for empty buildings to gain publicity. We killed over 3 million in Nam -- it was Hitlerian. Ayres was doing something about it.